[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: (meteorobs) WHY ARE WE SHIRKING OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE UNIVERSE?




> WHY ARE WE SHIRKING OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE UNIVERSE?
> 
> >From a recent discussion between Duncan Steel (Spaceguard
> Australia) and Oliver Morton (science journalist, London) on the
> "Third Culture" network. For further information see the EDGE
> Website (http://www.edge.org).

[Part of this insightful discourse relayed by Victor Noto snipped]

Until many people are killed by an impact, I don't foresee politicians
grasping the hazard and awarding it the funding it deserves.  Even then
it will only come about if action is demanded by the general public
(e.g. ban on hand guns in Britain following Dunblane shootings).

Politicians appear not to understand the concept of prevention not
cure.  There is too much reacting to events instead of shaping the
future.  I'm not sure how much of that arises from a lack of
imagination or foresight, the prevalent bean-counting philosophy, the
funding constraints, incompetence, media pressure, or the desire to be
re-elected (more money into the health service say wins more votes).

Politicians use similar arguments concerning road safety.  Oh no we
can't reduce the speed limit/having calming measures/have a pelican
crossing etc. because too few have died.  `Near misses' don't count.

The politicians need a kick up the back side.  Here's a project in
astronomy with a quick pay-back---it's almost applied science---yet
they'd rather people like Duncan work in a bank.  I have a painting by
Michael Carroll which depicts an asteroid just about to hit Washington
D.C. at dusk.  Now an event like that would make them sit up and take
notice.

Duncan> Lewis Wolpert's question struck a chord with me:

Strange coincidence.  He was on BBC TV's "Newsnight" last night supposedly
debating with Douglas Adams whether or not art and science should mix.

Malcolm

References: